Friday, 27 August 2010

"ESSENTIALLY NAIVE", PROFOUNDLY DEMORALIZING

This is so wrong I don't know where to begin. One of the most strikingly upsetting things is the evasive politicospeak of Cruddas's rationale:

We should not just be running from the record but having a nuanced approach to some of the things that went wrong, as well as defending the things that went right.

Such vapid bullshit.

I'm aware this is probably the outcome of some sort of long-brewing Granita-esque pact that will see Cruddas winning an influential right-hand position under David, butI really can't get my head around the sheer insincerity of the endorsement. The most outrageousclaim is that DM is a "communitarian":

What was interesting to me about this was when he started talking about belonging and neighbourliness and community, more communitarian politics, which is where I think Labour has to go. He's the only one [of the leadership contenders] that has got into some of that.

I've been following the leadership race pretty closely and I haven't once heard even a hint of sentiments like this from the elder Miliband. To me he seems very clearly and unambiguously the least community-minded of the six candidates, the least in touch with the notion of grassroots, the least human. It would be difficult to imagine a more cold-blooded, imperious mandarin.

For those that need reminding, here is a useful summary of David M's standpoint, somewhat approvingly relayed by the Telegraph last week. You just cannot justify phrases like

... big in heart but essentially naive, well-meaning but behind the times

I could throttle the superior little Fabian shit.

Let's hope Cruddas knows something we don't, but I very much doubt it judging from the vague, spurious reasons he gives for his backing in the New Statesman piece.

Sorry Jon, but I won't be voting as you advise me in your official campaign email. In fact, I'll probably resign my scarcely 2-month-old Labour Party membership if your man gets in.